Galt v. Paulin & Orendorf Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Southern Division. Bill by Thomas A. Galt and others against the Parlin & Orendorf Company to restrain the alleged infringement of a patent. Defendant obtained a decree. 52 Fed. 749. Complainants appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois, Southern Division. Bill by Thomas A. Galt and others against the Parlin & Orendorf Company to restrain the alleged infringement of a patent. Defendant obtained a decree. 52 Fed. 749. Complainants appeal. The case is well stated in. the following opinion of Judge Blodgett, delivered in the court below, and reported in 52 Fed. 749: This is a bill in equity for an injunction and accounting by reason of tbe alleged infringement of patent No. 197,545, granted November 27, 1877, to Jay S. Corbin, for an…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts). The bearing of the prior art upon the question of novelty and invention in Cor-bin’s combination may be illustrated by supposing two of the older machines to be employed side by side, — the wheel harrow of Bayless, without a lever, and adjustable only by means of a movable bolt, and the revolving spader or cultivator of Winters, with a lever mounted on the tongue, ready for the hand of the driver in his seat. In that situation the advantage of one driver over the other in respect to the easy and ready control of his machine would be clear enough, but not more…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Burr v. DuryeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Roberts v. RyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Fuller v. YentzerSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Collar Co. v. Van DusenSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Tucker v. SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Goshen Sweeper Co. of Grand Rapids v. Bissell Carpet-Sweeper Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895